Avoiding overly apologetic apologetics
Wednesday, October 28th, 2009If you follow apologetics at all, you’re likely familiar with Christopher Hitchens, the fiery atheist who has participated in a long string of debates with Christian thinkers and apologists. (I had a chance to attend one such debate last year; it was a fascinating experience.) On the heels of a new movie about his debates, Hitchens has written an interesting piece at Slate about what he learned from debating religious people around the world.
There are some characteristically sharp barbs about different branches of Christianity in the article, so bear that in mind before you read it. But I do recommend reading it, because it’s always useful to hear an honest account from the “other side” of the great debate over the truth of Christianity. What stands out to me is the reason Hitchens cites for respecting his debate opponent, Pastor Wilson:
Wilson isn’t one of those evasive Christians who mumble apologetically about how some of the Bible stories are really just “metaphors.” He is willing to maintain very staunchly that Jesus of Nazareth was the Christ and that his sacrifice redeems our state of sin, which in turn is the outcome of our rebellion against God. He doesn’t waffle when asked why God allows so much evil and suffering—of course he “allows” it since it is the inescapable state of rebellious sinners. I much prefer this sincerity to the vague and Python-esque witterings of the interfaith and ecumenical groups who barely respect their own traditions and who look upon faith as just another word for community organizing.
Hitchens finds it more intellectually satisfying to debate a Christian who firmly and unapologetically believes in the core doctrines of the faith—as opposed to waffling on controversial questions or trying to tone down difficult topics.
Now, I don’t want to be unfair to the ecumenical groups that Hitchens criticizes here. But in thinking through my own responses when my faith is challenged in some way, I can’t deny that one of my strongest initial impulses is to try to tone down or moderate Christian beliefs that I actually hold strongly. I’m not sure if that’s a form of cowardice or a misguided attempt at conversational peacekeeping, but it’s helpful to be reminded that a response which communicates embarrassment about my own beliefs is not only shameful to me, but it’s intellectually and spiritually unhelpful to the person I’m talking to.
Is this something you struggle with? Have you learned how to earnestly contend for your faith without either being obnoxious about it, or apologetic about it? How do you respond when challenged to defend a belief that might draw scorn or skepticism?



